Sunday, July 09, 2017

Fwd: The Neoliberal Agenda

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: John Hemington <>

The three attachments are in some ways related as evidencing the results of the neoliberal plutocracy.  In the first, Paul Street details what I have been arguing from the beginning about the Trump election.  That is, that the primary support for Trump did not come from working and lower class whites.  Instead, his strongest support came from what I describe as country club/chamber of commerce whites who are generally well off and represent one of the most reactionary forces in our society.  They tend to care about only two issues, lower (or no) taxes and the elimination of 'unnecessary' regulations.  This is a quasi-libertarian group which tends to care only for their own selfish interests – a core constituency of the neoliberal thought collective.  They strongly believe that they have no responsibility at all for the ills of society nor any interest helping others.  Strangely enough, many, if not most are or believe themselves to be committed Christians – though they seem to have a strange interpretation of Christ's teaching.  The second article deals with plutocracy, its consequences and how both major political parties have come to represent its interests.  The third article discusses the impact of neoliberal agenda on higher education caprification of university teaching positions along with labor's efforts to organize adjuncts and graduate assistants in order to afford a reasonable living opportunity.

One thing that has been quite clear to me is that many of the so called working class whites who voted for Trump were not so much voting for Trump as against the plutocracy which controls both major parties.  It is also clear to me that had the Democratic Party not deliberately sabotaged Bernie Sanders campaign, Sanders would have soundly beaten Trump in at least two of the contested Rust Belt states and won the election.  The shame is that the Democratic Party cares more about pleasing its billionaire contributors than it does about doing what needs to be done for the people and for society as a whole.  This is not the same as saying that Bernie Sanders was the best possible candidate or that all of his policies would have been beneficial.  He was much too willing to follow the military in its effort to subdue the world for corporate interests, but his economic policies would have benefitted many millions of Americans – and most Americans understood that, particularly on the issue of health care for all.



No comments: